A front page New York Times story indicates even prestigious law firms are not immune to clueless behavior:
Four men, who were charged by New York prosecutors on Thursday with orchestrating a nearly four-year scheme to manipulate the firm’s books to keep it afloat during the financial crisis, talked openly in emails about “fake income,” “accounting tricks” and their ability to fool the firm’s “clueless auditor,” the prosecutors said.
Dumb, dumb, dumb. Don’t engage in conduct like this, and if you must, show some common sense.
Kevin O’Keefe makes a great point about the powerful self-corrective nature of social media:
Traditional legal publishers are quick to question the reliability of information from blogs and Twitter.
How do you know if the blog post is correct? Is the blogger authoritative? Anyone can jump on Twitter and start to Tweet. Look at all the false information that’s tweeted during breaking news.
There’s almost a smugness I get when I discuss the value of social media with traditional publishers. They’re just blogs. It’s just Twitter. It can be be just a lot of noise coming at you.
As Bailey points out, many overlook the fact that the aggregate data can often give the most accurate lens by which information can be confirmed.
What’s more reliable? One legal reporter calling a source or two and getting out a story the next day or five or ten lawyers blogging on the legal development that day with comments and Tweets commenting on the blog posts.
via Legal social media trumps traditional reporting and peer review.